Both Mon 863 and NK 603 are Monsanto’s genetically modified corn varieties. Mon 863 has a bacterial gene to give pest tolerance, while NK 603 has a bacterial gene for herbicide tolerance. An Independent analysis last year, done by the Committee for Independent Research and Information On Genetic Engineering and French National Committee For Risk Assessment of GMOs had concluded that both Mon 863 and NK 603 pose serious health impacts.

The find comes from India by Greenpeas after an independent laboratory in germany conducted Tests on products picked up randomly from a supermarket in New Delhi.

Under existing Indian laws this is illegal practice. Every importer is required to label the products containing any GM content as well as get prior approval from the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee which falls under the environment ministry.

Surprisingly in 2007 United Arba Emirates have confirmed that 40% of the food in the UAE is genetically modified yet is sold to the end users without proper labelling.

While in Europe if an item contains more than 0.9 per cent of GMOs it is required to carry a label.

Its growing concern among many developing countries that import products from US where Monsanto dominates the food chain with its GM seeds. And it is going to create more controversy as Monsanto has aggressive plans in milk production. It already has a product on Bovine somatotropin a natural protein produced in the pituitary glands of all cattle which helps adult cows to produce milk. Monsanto’s version of Bovine somatotropin is a leading dairy animal health product in the United States and many other countries.

Do you share the same concern if you are in EU then relax the rules stipulates that GM food should carry the label to distinguish them from the rest of the crowd. But what if that is not enough.

The website http://www.psrast.org/ gives a list that should worry any spokesperson for GM . well I am certainly concerned and not at all against GM food and GMO studies especially if it can create cheaper medicines or study drug resistance in microbes

According to Charles Saunders, chairman of the British Medical Association’s public health committee

”We simply do not have enough reliable scientific evidence on their safety to be able to make a valid decision as to whether there are potential health effects or not.

Already, an estimated 1 to 2 percent of Americans are allergic to some food, and their reactions can be serious or even fatal.

Food allergies are caused by proteins which are made by genes. Indeed, the whole purpose of genetic engineering is to force a plant or animal to make new proteins.

In one of the few pieces of hard evidence about the health dangers of genetic engineering, Stephen Taylor, who studies food allergies at the University of Nebraska, found that moving a gene indeed made a new food allergenic.

The regulatory part of the genome was two to three times larger than the portion that actually held the instructions for individual proteins.

With so much of the genome devoted to regulation, it became apparent that evolution could work by simply changing the instructions rather than changing the protein-coding genes themselves.

A tiny opossum’s genome has shed light on how evolution creates new creatures from old, showing that change primarily comes by finding new ways of turning existing genes on and off

Does the finding prove that transgenic foods are inherently dangerous? Not really